Gonçalo Amaral confirms he will appeal the damages decision to higher Court.

[Alfred R Jones]

Ow er, do I see another intelligent person! Perhaps the Media were after something else? Interesting that no-one's commented on the 'so-called burglaries' which no-one in the Algarve or even in Portugal has heard of?

What sort of something else would they be interested in from Leanne Baulch?  Who does her hair maybe? 

What is your point re the break -ins?  You think because (according to N Donn) no  one in PT has heard of them that they have been invented by the Met?

[Mr Gray]

The judge confirmed that the book was factual and based on the police files as did the Tribunal de Relação in October 2010.

don't talk stupid...the book was based on the files but contained things that were not in the files..read the judgement again

[Mr Gray]

RE: The bit in bold above - why would Leanne Baulch have already been approached by journalists who were NOT interested in covering the story until it reached £25k - can you explain the sense of that?

"Hello Leanne - I'm a journalist with the Sun and I'm just contacting you to let you knowI'm not interested in writing about your fund until it reaches £25k". 

Yeah, as any intelligent person can see, that makes no sense at all!

I agree ...looks like she approached the press and were told they were not interested

[Anna]

What sort of something else would they be interested in from Leanne Baulch?  Who does her hair maybe? 

What is your point re the break -ins?  You think because (according to N Donn) no  one in PT has heard of them that they have been invented by the Met?

Not invented at all. Several of the staff commented on burglaries, as did Mrs Fenn. Here's one staff member:-

Questioned, he states that, last Thursday, he was off duty but was called by the reception and went to the resort around 020H30 to open a door that had problems. After completing the work for which he was called, which took him about 15 minutes, he left for his residence,

and was again contacted, at around 22H15 to ask him if there were torch/flash lights that could be used to help look for a child that had gone missing. The deponent responded that there weren’t any and was not called again that night.
• When he arrived the next morning, around 07H10, he encountered many people and GNR/police close to block 5 along with some foreigners, who, at the time, he associated with the disappearance of the child he had heard about the night before. He headed toward his place of work and that morning carried out his functions which included the cleaning of the pools next to the Tapas restaurant. He did not notice anything out of the ordinary.
• During the day he learnt more via his colleagues of the story of the missing child.
• Questioned, he states that he never came across a circumstance that made him pay particular attention to this family, not with the children or before the disappearance.
• Questioned, he states that he does not remember having seen Madeleine’s face before her photograph was released in the media and which he helped distribute to the apartments after her disappearance.
• He states that the break-ins to the apartments are common, especially
for burglary purposes, and that some are the result of clients leaving their doors open.
• Questioned, he states that according to what he remembers, he did not observe any abnormal movements by any individual that would indicate s/he was preparing to commit a criminal act.
• And nothing more was said. He reads and finds it in conformity.
http://themaddiecasefiles.com/post178.html#p178

[mercury]

I agree ...looks like she approached the press and were told they were not interested

Why does it "look like" she approached the press? Do you have evidence to point to that? After the Brenda Leyland tragedy I doubt anyone would "contact the press" if they were on the "wrong side".

 The Sun, I think, already did an article on "trolls" fund raising for Mr Amaral. It's more than likely other papers did get in touch. That's the more "intelligent" probability.

[faithlilly]

We are told by the McCanns that it's not about the money. Let's see if on appeal the book ban remains but the damages are reduced to €10 whether that still remains true.

[Mr Gray]

Why does it "look like" she approached the press? Do you have evidence to point to that? After the Brenda Leyland tragedy I doubt anyone would "contact the press" if they were on the "wrong side".

 The Sun, I think, already did an article on "trolls" fund raising for Mr Amaral. It's more than likely other papers did get in touch. That's the more "intelligent" probability.

Why would they get in touch and not want a story...she is courting publicity...I don't particularly blame her...she believes amaral when he says the dogs prove maddie died in the apartment...no wonder these people think there's a conspiracy...if I believed what amaral has said I would think the same. The difference is I have enough sense to realise it.

[Alfred R Jones]

Why does it "look like" she approached the press? Do you have evidence to point to that? After the Brenda Leyland tragedy I doubt anyone would "contact the press" if they were on the "wrong side".

 The Sun, I think, already did an article on "trolls" fund raising for Mr Amaral. It's more than likely other papers did get in touch. That's the more "intelligent" probability.

Did you read Natasha's article?  It makes little sense.  Journos do not approach people to tell them they're not interested in covering their stories until circumstances change.  It certainly sounds much more likely that Baulch approached them and that is why the journos said what they did, I doubt you see the logic in that but there we are.

[G-Unit]

Why does it "look like" she approached the press? Do you have evidence to point to that? After the Brenda Leyland tragedy I doubt anyone would "contact the press" if they were on the "wrong side".

 The Sun, I think, already did an article on "trolls" fund raising for Mr Amaral. It's more than likely other papers did get in touch. That's the more "intelligent" probability.

If the editors read the comments by those donating they would have realised that the effect of the Sun article was to increase donations. That's why they are waiting to report the story in case they are accused of encouraging the fundraising too imo.

[Montclair]

Not read that part of the learned judge's judgement.

But do you really believe (for example) that Amaral contradicted and corrected Prior on interpretation of the forensic results?

Or that Prior then rang the FSS to berate them on the PJ's powers of arrest?

Do you still think that the woman at the trial who said most of Amaral's book was made up was being ironic?

I suggest that you read the judgement again then.

None of the above has any bearing on whether the book was factual or not. And the woman lawyer was being ironic but of course you don't want to believe that do you?

[Montclair]

Erm... that's not exactly what she said, is it, Montclair?

What did she say then? That the book was full of lies?

[Mr Gray]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CE0BesSWAAAhEOf.png

could someone tell me ..how is giving money to amaral going to help Maddie...more lies

[Alfred R Jones]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CE0BesSWAAAhEOf.png

could someone tell me ..how is giving money to amaral going to help Maddie...more lies

How cynical and tasteless can The Gonc Fanclub get?  Cashing in on Madeleine's birthday to finance the man who wrote her off as dead years ago and who tried to convince the world her parents hid her remains.  Is there no end to these vile people's cruelty?   

[Brietta]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CE0BesSWAAAhEOf.png

could someone tell me ..how is giving money to amaral going to help Maddie...more lies

I think it is rather crass given the circumstances, but what else would one expect.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CE0BesSWAAAhEOf.png

[stephen25000]

Good news this morning.

I have just seen this on Amazon.

'  Amaral obviously now has ample funds for the simple process of lodging an appeal, which will just be a formality, given that the court granted him permission to do so.

He will then have a year or so to build up further funds, if required, for the appeal itself.

Do you remember what happened last time?

The Court of Appeal unceremoniously overturned the lower court's ridiculous ruling, and the Supreme Court judges didn't even think it was worth getting out of bed to hear a McCann appeal against that. '